Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

These ads will disappear if you register on the forum

Photo

Do you think incest and polygamy will be legalized?


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

Poll: Do you think incest and polygamy will be legalized? (46 member(s) have cast votes)

Will incest and polygamy be legalized in the future?

  1. Yes (25 votes [54.35%])

    Percentage of vote: 54.35%

  2. No (9 votes [19.57%])

    Percentage of vote: 19.57%

  3. Only incest (1 votes [2.17%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.17%

  4. Only polygamy (11 votes [23.91%])

    Percentage of vote: 23.91%

Should in your opinion be incest and polygamy legalized?

  1. Yes (21 votes [45.65%])

    Percentage of vote: 45.65%

  2. No (9 votes [19.57%])

    Percentage of vote: 19.57%

  3. Only incest (2 votes [4.35%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.35%

  4. Only polygamy (14 votes [30.43%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.43%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1
JesseBrandon

JesseBrandon

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 111 posts

I was watching a tv show recently and surprisingly, three characters (two men and a woman) got together in a sexual AND romantic relationship - as in, it wasn't just a kink, they were serious about it, they even made their relationship official to their family/friends. And it got me thinking, do you guys think polygamy will ever be legalized? And incest? And should they be, and if not, why? Will our society ever see it as acceptable/normal like with gay relationships?

 

IMO Yes/Yes. I think that both will be legalized in most countries in the distant future (I guess we probably won't see it happen in our lifetimes) and that there shouldn't be any problem with it if it's between consenting adults (+18 at least) who hurt no one. If it makes these people happy, that's what matters. So I'm curious, what do you guys think?

 

NOTE: The first poll question is about whether you think incest and/or polygamy will be legalized in the future, regardless of whether you personally want that to happen or not, which is the second poll question.



#2
Cosmic Cat

Cosmic Cat

    Hibernating

  • Validating
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,345 posts
  • Location-
Its still a a taboo for me because you can get better women than your sibling or you mother. I just see incest as a pathetic way to love. Like how does the wheel of your love life land on your sister? Don't reply on this because I'm too tired to want to get in an argument over it. On polygamy, i believe it should be legalized if the woman consent with it. But i do not know how a woman would like to love a man who love other woman. It seems like a way to cheat without making her mad.

#3
PhoenixRu

PhoenixRu

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,089 posts
  • LocationRussia

I'm strongly against incest, but see no any problem in polygamy.



#4
lechwall

lechwall

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 170 posts
  • LocationSunny England

I think polygamy will though not within the next 50 years, incest probably never.


"The future will be better tomorrow.  If we do not succeed, then we run the risk of failure.   For NASA, space is still a high priority. The Holocaust was an obscene period in our nation's history. No, not our nation's, but in World War II. I mean, we all lived in this century. I didn't live in this century, but in this century's history. Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child. We're going to have the best-educated American people in the world."  Dan Quayle

 


#5
four

four

    Moon Princess

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 473 posts
  • LocationThe Universe.

incest probably never.

 

people would have said the same about gay marriage 100 years ago.


  • FutureOfToday, TheAsianGuy_LOL, Futurist and 2 others like this
My collection of quotes
Spoiler

#6
FutureOfToday

FutureOfToday

    CY: 2015

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,685 posts
  • LocationMaidstone, UK
I think they both will and should be legalised. Live and let live.
  • Lunix688, GottSchreit and SkyHize like this
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

#7
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,664 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

I'm honestly unsure about this because there might not be enough demand to legalize either of these two things.


  • stuffed_leader likes this

#8
GenX

GenX

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,045 posts
  • LocationSo Cal

Well, my first thought is: "Incest!  Ewwwwwwwww!!!"  and I want to say that it should stay illegal.  However, my beliefs are that the government should not make any laws that affect anyone pursuing their own happiness as long as everyone is consenting and it doesn't hurt anyone, so I guess I'm forced to say that it should be legal as long as it doesn't result in a baby with genetic defects being born.  That means that the couple would either have to always use birth control, or technology exists to enable them to have a healthy baby. 

 

Of course pologamy should be legal and there's no reason for it ever to have been illegal in the first place.


The only thing we ever want is more


#9
Alric

Alric

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,022 posts

They are stupid laws. You should be able to do whatever you want with other consenting adults. Marriage is just a contract as well, if you want to marry out of love in a straight or gay relationship, or marry for money, or to get citizenship or because you made a bet, all those should be consider valid reasons. The government shouldn't be deciding who should or shouldn't get married, they should only be recognizing all marriages people ask them to recognize. 


  • GottSchreit likes this

#10
Unity

Unity

    Information Organism

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,329 posts

If we could overcome the genetic problems then would incest be accepted?  Not advocating for it definitely, because incidence of birth defect is very high (somewhere above 50% I forget and we are talking serious die before you're 5 years old birth defects and major retardation).



#11
Alric

Alric

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,022 posts

We have birth control today though. So if people have safe sex and are in no real danger of having a child, then what is wrong with it? People kind of think that relationship leads to children but that isn't even remotely true. A lot of people have sexual relationship with no interest in having children. If two consenting adults have sex and don't have a child there is no argument what so ever for banning it, other than some people think it is gross. Something being gross isn't a reason for it to be illegal.



#12
GottSchreit

GottSchreit

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationThe United States of America

First of all, I'd like to point out that in some ways this debate is moot: polygamy in some form is already legal in many countries, sex with a close relative is legal in some, and marriage to your half-sibling is legal in Sweden. Any push for more legal recognition in other countries would just be a continuation of what already exists.

 

I'm honestly unsure about this because there might not be enough demand to legalize either of these two things.

 

Actually, there's demand for both, because there are people in either type of relationship (sometimes in both at once), and their relationships are extremely illegal in many places. In some states simply cohabitating with multiple people of the opposite gender counts as a common-law marriage, and can get all of you sent to jail for up to 10 years. In most Southern states, as well as some states in Australia, a single sex act with a consenting adult you are related to, regardless of whether you two grew up together, can get both sent to jail for life. There is also a growing community of allies, many from the LGBT+ community, who support relationship and marriage freedom for all consenting adults, regardless of any qualifiers.

 

My blog

My friend's blogs

 

There are also other people publicly speaking out against discrimination and legal abuse. Some are even trying to change culture through positive media representations.

 

They're real people, and under the current legal regime and set of taboos they suffer, sometimes brutally. Just because you don't personally know of them doesn't mean they aren't there. In fact, you may know some and just don't know you know them. Consanguineous couples especially, are deep, deep in the closet.

 

I'd also like to point out that according to surveys (and some testimony from people I know), as much as 10% (possibly more) of the population in the US has at least sexually experimented with a sibling (non-coercively, of course). Anyone who advocates for "incest" laws is advocating for throwing as much as a tenth of the entire population into jail.

 

If we could overcome the genetic problems then would incest be accepted?  Not advocating for it definitely, because incidence of birth defect is very high (somewhere above 50% I forget and we are talking serious die before you're 5 years old birth defects and major retardation).

 

First of all, genetic testing and family planning does allow people to overcome "the genetic problems". Sometimes there are no genetic problems. Your statistic is also incredibly high, and smacks of stereotypes and not science. Of all the reasonably well done studies I've seen, the most pessimistic estimate for genetic problems for 1st degree relatives is 30%. The more realistic estimate I've seen is around 11%, 1.5% lower than for middle aged women. (That's for a single generation, of course.) Those are population statistics anyway. Individual couples may be more or less likely to have problems, just like the general population. Also, there are people in the general population who are not closely related, but both possess terrible genetic diseases which they can pass on to their children, but we don't forbid them from getting married or throw them in jail for having sex. Scientists who know anything about this subject think the eugenic argument is bunk. (I personally find eugenic reasoning to be anti-democratic. It also allows a return to eugenics based on things like race and class). For one, even for the best studies, everyone is aware that their samples are so small and so biased that they can't really even conduct a statistically reliable study beyond 1st cousins, since in most places closer unions are illegal.

 

"Major retardation" is not the most common defect anyway. The usual problems are related to the immune system or to basic organ function, like the heart. Most of these children are totally fine, and the ones that aren't are still mentally normal. Who is anyone to determine that their lives have no value to themselves or society, and should be prevented at all costs, even at the cost of undermining human rights? Besides, not all consanguineous relationships are even heterosexual.

 

They are stupid laws. You should be able to do whatever you want with other consenting adults. Marriage is just a contract as well, if you want to marry out of love in a straight or gay relationship, or marry for money, or to get citizenship or because you made a bet, all those should be consider valid reasons. The government shouldn't be deciding who should or shouldn't get married, they should only be recognizing all marriages people ask them to recognize. 

 

Amen! I'd also like to point out that many people don't feel disgust anymore towards the idea of homosexuality is because it's seen frequently in public. Many people still do feel disgust at the idea, even when they support same-sex marriage, and many more felt disgust at the thought in the past. It's a known mechanism, in which seeing another person do something you wouldn't do makes you imagine yourself doing it. The revulsion felt at that mental imagery causes people to lash out at the people who inspired the thoughts. It's the same social psychological mechanism, though perhaps for consanguineous sex the revulsion is stronger for some people.

 

"Naturalness" also isn't a good rubric for these things. While most animals avoid sex with close relatives in nature, not all do. While most animals have sex with an animal of the opposite sex, not all do. Polygyny, polyandry, and polygynandry all occur in nature. (Polygyny is much more common than monogamy in nature. Should monogamous marriage be illegal?) Which is natural, the majority, or the minority, given that both occur in nature? Besides, neither homophobia, nor the "incest" taboo, occur in nature outside of human culture. Same-sex and consanguineous sex acts are more "natural" by many standards, than the taboos and laws against them.

 

Sexual morality is too important to the happiness and the well-being of us all to be determined by superstition, politics, economics, and religious taboos.

  • stuffed_leader and Ewan like this

#13
GottSchreit

GottSchreit

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationThe United States of America

Its still a a taboo for me because you can get better women than your sibling or you mother. I just see incest as a pathetic way to love. Like how does the wheel of your love life land on your sister? Don't reply on this because I'm too tired to want to get in an argument over it. On polygamy, i believe it should be legalized if the woman consent with it. But i do not know how a woman would like to love a man who love other woman. It seems like a way to cheat without making her mad.

 

A lot of assumptions there. What if your mother is the best woman, objectively? What if you meet them for the first time long after you've grown up? Not everyone, even the ones who get involved with family, are ugly, antisocial, or can't get anyone else. Some have already been married before to other people. Besides, "better"? Are we cattle? Are we judging marriage purely by economic status and social acceptance? That's a great way to produce loveless, alienating marriages. Wonderful for the children, I'm sure, to have one of your parents pining the whole time for someone else.

 

First of all, "a woman" doesn't have to agree to anything. In the example for the poll, the union is polyandrous - multiple men, one woman. Why aren't you asking how "a man" would agree to it, unless you have a gendered conception of promiscuity and consent, where only men want sex with various people, and women have to be cajoled. And it is not "cheating", by definition. Cheating is having sex with someone else without your partner(s)'s consent. Key to the idea and the term "cheating" is going behind someone's back. Having sex with a second spouse, whom your other spouse knows and approves of, with the knowledge of your other spouse, is not "cheating". People also tend to be less threatened when the other person is someone they know and are friends with. People have different levels of natural jealousy, and jealousy can be mitigated with proper conversation and conflict resolution. People get jealous when they feel their own emotional and sexual needs aren't being met/won't be met. Jealousy, for the exact same reasons, exists in monogamous relationships as well. Jealousy is just more obvious in polyamorous relationships. As a result, people who've been poly* for a long time are usually much better at dealing with jealousy and talking honestly about their feelings with their partners than many monogamous people.



#14
Matthew

Matthew

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,137 posts

Yes, I doubt anything will be looked down on in the future.


I am a social democrat!

-Believes in  Capitalism but also that government needs to regulate and help the poorest among us.


#15
GottSchreit

GottSchreit

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationThe United States of America

Yes, I doubt anything will be looked down on in the future.

 

I hope rape and child abuse will still be looked down upon. Acknowledging the rights of consenting, informed adults with fully formed brains and life experience, does not mean being laissez-faire with ethics. I'm against "love laws" for adults because I think they're unjust, imprecise, and that blanket taboos for non-harmful acts make society more dysfunctional. I think it would be better for adults, and children, if people didn't feel shame for things of little to no consequence.

 

I think heaping more shame for "incest" onto the victims of familial sexual abuse is horrifying. Victims of abuse, and the children of consenting consanguineous parents, hear all the things people say, and the way things are portrayed in the media, and internalize that shame. Why are we doing this to children? Why are we putting them on sex-offender registries for nothing?



#16
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,664 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

For reference, I think that the main argument that opponents of legalized incest use is that 95% or 99% or 99.9% of all incestuous relationships are non-consensual (and by this, they are also including consensual relationships which are only due to attachment syndrome).



#17
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,664 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

Basically, these people's argument is that it is easier to ban all cases of incest than to simply try determining if it is genuinely consensual and non-abusive on a case-by-case basis.



#18
Unity

Unity

    Information Organism

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,329 posts

Your statistic is also incredibly high, and smacks of stereotypes and not science. Of all the reasonably well done studies I've seen, the most pessimistic estimate for genetic problems for 1st degree relatives is 30%.
 
 
^Meta-analysis of genetic defects due to incest
 
Incest is not like other recessive characteristics, the risk of serious birth defects and premature death is about 42% of births with another 14% having mild retardation making over half of children born to first degree relatives have some kind of genetic defect
 
Posted Image

  • GottSchreit likes this

#19
Ewan

Ewan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,093 posts
  • LocationLondon

GottSchreit already covered most of the points, my opinion is yes on both fronts. The laws surrounding incest aren't in line with other sectors of society (old couples or those with genetic diseases). Risk of defects isn't a valid reason for illegality. 


  • stuffed_leader, Futurist and GottSchreit like this

#20
Italian Ufo

Italian Ufo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,190 posts

I hope polygamy will be legalized and acceptable even in the west. I always dreamed to have multiple wives.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users